General Discussion (dev branch)

[dragon01 902]

It is impossible to destroy projectiles with another weapon in ArmA. End of the story. Same reason why CIWS or RAM don't intercept most things that they logically should. Also the reason why APS on tanks is not a thing.

[yax 595]

What dragon01 said, it would likely be very difficult for BI to implement core change like letting munitions collide with each other, and it might very well break a bunch of stuff or become pretty performance intensive.

 

For those who do want CIWS/C-RAM systems there's always mods. Afaik HAFM and Pookie's sams have some kind of system for CIWS. ITC Land also has a system for it that's fully vanilla compatible that works by spawning an invisible radar target on shells and missiles, that will automatically delete the projectile when it gets destroyed.

[GBee2 68]

On 25/07/2018 at 4:50 PM, dragon01 said:

Yeah, it's pretty amazing. Visuals are spot-on, but using it in SP is kind of a chore, not to mention guidance is weird. The warhead is kind of underpowered as well (oddly enough, the explosion is too large, if anything). As I mentioned of the previous page, the real Tomahawk does not track targets in any way. 

 

So which cruise missile does have tracking, including ability to target moving vehicles? I saw a whole thing about the capabilities of latest gen cruise missiles a few years ago and this was touted as an actual working capability. It was said to be able to arrive on target, and if the vehicle had moved from that position it would attempt to reacquire. It was definitely a NATO nations system, but not necessarily American. I really thought they were talking about the Tomahawk, but I can't be sure I'm remembering that correctly.

[snakeplissken 96]

Would it be possible to have a control terminal, where you can control the weapons manually without the need to have a portable UAV control in the inventory?

 

Example of what could be a control terminal in the image below.

* So we could put the terminal inside the destroyer or even a control base to do some crazy missions XD

 

This is the ArmA 2 UAV terminal.

[dragon01 902]

2 hours ago, GBee2 said:

So which cruise missile does have tracking, including ability to target moving vehicles? I saw a whole thing about the capabilities of latest gen cruise missiles a few years ago and this was touted as an actual working capability. It was said to be able to arrive on target, and if the vehicle had moved from that position it would attempt to reacquire. It was definitely a NATO nations system, but not necessarily American. I really thought they were talking about the Tomahawk, but I can't be sure I'm remembering that correctly.

You are probably remembering right. Block IV TLAM will have active radar homing, allowing it to track moving targets in terminal phase. It appears to be scheduled to enter service in 2021, but since my source is from 2016, the current administration might have changed something. That said, this is mostly spoken of in terms of maritime attack capability. Since they retired the TSM some time ago, USN is kinda short on ship-to-ship options. This radar might be good enough to work on vehicles, but that's not its primary purpose.

 

Generally, cruise missiles do have terminal radar tracking of some sort, however this is because most of them are intended to use against ships. Radar guidance against vehicles is very problematic (and thus a recent development) due to ground clutter and their lower radar returns. Not saying you can't have a land attack cruise missile with terminal GTT guidance, but it is rather complicated. Not only that, given the ranges involved, designating the target is difficult, since you can't track it from launch platform (ships are visible at extremely long ranges, tanks are not), and unlike ballistic missiles, you can't count on it being "somewhere in front of the missile", as CMs tend to be subsonic and thus take much longer to reach the target than BMs. It probably can be done with modern/future tech, but it's complex and the resulting system would very likely require additional input from the launch platform after reaching the target area (which, admittedly, is supposed to be doable with TLAM Block IV).

[oukej 2910]

On 7/25/2018 at 5:50 PM, dragon01 said:

the real Tomahawk does not track targets in any way.

The Venator cruise missile will only "track" the datalink target. So there still has to be some friendly vehicle reporting and updating the target position. It's something like (benevolent) mid-flight corrections.

 

Quote

@oukej, would that be possible to make artillery missiles that follow terrain? Ideally, the Venator would be that, with (optional, for moving targets/extra precision) terminal laser guidance.

The combination didn't work well. Or at least if it was made as an artillery weapon the word "vertical" in VLS couln't be held true ;) If you want (if you want player) to simple target an area (without any reporting unit at the AO) atm you'll have to "prepare" some (empty) targets and use the reportRemoteTarget command.

[the_one_and_only_Venator 162]

6 hours ago, oukej said:

If you want (if you want player) to simple target an area (without any reporting unit at the AO) atm you'll have to "prepare" some (empty) targets and use the reportRemoteTarget command.

 

Thanks a lot. That is the answer to a question I just posted in one of the scripting threads :)

[dragon01 902]

 

8 hours ago, oukej said:

The combination didn't work well. Or at least if it was made as an artillery weapon the word "vertical" in VLS couln't be held true ;) If you want (if you want player) to simple target an area (without any reporting unit at the AO) atm you'll have to "prepare" some (empty) targets and use the reportRemoteTarget command.

Excellent, I wanted to know this, too. :) This will do. In fact, I suppose a repeatable trigger for firing the missiles will be easier to use than going through the arty system each time (since you would never want salvo fire in this case).

[POLPOX 766]

Can B01 make the VLS hatches and exhausts doors animate via script commands?

Currently, VLS hatches have two states, opened and closed, there is no way to animate smoothly and open exhausts doors and stay open after launch is unrealistic and unbelievable.

[Lbbde 28]

A few questions to the developers:
Will the aft upper deck of the Liberty be accessible in the future? There are at least two doors there and in the immediate vicinity, one floor down, is another door from which you could theoretically very well get up and down (a ladder and a simple T-shaped gangway) and how much work would cost you, how many people would have to work on it and how many hours worked you spend for it? (a serious question, not 'how hard can that be?')
On average, how much time does it take for a new object to completely create it from scratch (ie with design, animation, functionality, code etc.)?
How much effort is it for you to modify existing objects (for example, to reinstall a RCWS on a vehicle, to replace one weapon with another, to create an alternative version (UP variant))?
More concrete: how difficult would it be for you to create AA and GMG variants of Prowler and Quilin (with the Titan AA Launcher and Mk32 GMG)?
and how big would be the effort to create a new object, if you recombine already existing components (eg: as already mentioned by me, an autocanon for the destroyer from the 20mm weapon of the Nyx and possibly the basis of one of the other weapon systems for the Liberty / Freedom)

(MRAPs with the AA and AT weapon systems from the Nyx would certainly be cool as well, with me personally at the moment the AA and GMG versions for the LSVs are more important :D)

Btw did you notice that the numbers on the hull of the Liberty vanish when you enter a two-digit number in one of the text boxes in the editor? :O

[SuicideKing 233]

3 hours ago, POLPOX said:

Can B01 make the VLS hatches and exhausts doors animate via script commands?

Currently, VLS hatches have two states, opened and closed, there is no way to animate smoothly and open exhausts doors and stay open after launch is unrealistic and unbelievable.

To be entirely fair to them, I can see why this is low priority, in most cases people won't be near the launch site. Would be nice though, yeah.

 

2 hours ago, Lbbde said:

Will the aft upper deck of the Liberty be accessible in the future?

Given that they added a "no entry" texture to them, I suspect that's not going to change soon.

 

2 hours ago, Lbbde said:

More concrete: how difficult would it be for you to create AA and GMG variants of Prowler and Quilin (with the Titan AA Launcher and Mk32 GMG)?

myLSV addWeaponTurret ["missiles_titan_static",[0,0]];
myLSV addMagazineTurret ["1Rnd_GAA_missiles",[0,0]];

(turret path may just be [0], use the command allTurrets to find out)

 

2 hours ago, Lbbde said:

and how big would be the effort to create a new object, if you recombine already existing components (eg: as already mentioned by me, an autocanon for the destroyer from the 20mm weapon of the Nyx and possibly the basis of one of the other weapon systems for the Liberty / Freedom)

Well, considering we don't have static M2 HMGs or SPG9 yet...

[winse 22]

Hi, guys, such a question:

There is a command: inGameUISetEventHandler . You can run something like:

inGameUISetEventHandler ["Action", "player commandChat str _this"]

And receive information about actions player select.

 

But, some actions are not informative enough. Say when you get into a helicopter co-pilot/door-gunner/cargo-turret - you receive the same engine action name - GetInTurret - with no particular turret specification. Same for different vehicle types, and similar things with "Move to position" actions. 

So there is no chance to figure out which vehicle position player is trying to occupy.

 

@oukej is there a chance inGameUISetEventHandler would also return turret details for the "GetIn.."/"MoveTo.."/"Swap.." actions?

 

PS: What I try to achieve - is to restrict players from occupying some vehicle positions: e.g. a sniper can't be a heli pilot/co-pilot, but can be a door-gunner or a human-turret crew. I know I could achieve that through the GetIn/SeatSwitched event handlers, pushing players out of a vehicle. But I consider that way too unserious and player-unfriendly, and suggest in 2018 mission makers might treat players a more respectful way.   

 

[Ivanoff.N 61]

Added: A new "takeOffReversed" airport parameter changing the direction of taking off from an airport  <== anyone knows how to use this ?

[jone_kone 158]

Anyone else experiencing issues with Zooming in on the Mk45 Hammer? I get a complete pc crash if I zoom in with the hammer.

 

EDIT: Solved. It was the GPU drivers that was messed up. Somehow i managed to replicate the issue two times specifically with the hammer hence thinking there was some issue with it.

[oukej 2910]

1 hour ago, Ivanoff.N said:

Added: A new "takeOffReversed" airport parameter changing the direction of taking off from an airport  <== anyone knows how to use this ?

It's used on Tanoa airports (main and south-eastern) and it makes the AI take-off in the opposite direction of landing - so the AI can land from sea and take-off towards sea, avoiding the steep glideslope required for landing over the hills from the other side.

 

On 7/31/2018 at 11:19 AM, winse said:

 

@oukej is there a chance inGameUISetEventHandler would also return turret details for the "GetIn.."/"MoveTo.."/"Swap.." actions?

Understand the nice motivation, but I have to say that most probably there won't be any change to the command. I am sorry.

 

[Ivanoff.N 61]

Just now, oukej said:

It's used on Tanoa airports (main and south-eastern) and it makes the AI take-off in the opposite direction of landing - so the AI can land from sea and take-off towards sea, avoiding the steep glideslope required for landing over the hills from the other side.

Yes, but can it be used in mission to change takeoff direction dynamically ? Or is it terrain based and in configs of the map itself ?

[oukej 2910]

5 minutes ago, Ivanoff.N said:

 terrain based and in configs of the map itself

This

[Ivanoff.N 61]

10 minutes ago, oukej said:

This

Okay, thanx

[Igor Nikolaev 511]

Can't see any changes made to the East Wind's campaign (besides the numerous fixes applied). No fresh assets will be ever added, or will the update release later in future? 

[lexx 1331]

I haven't checked it out yet, but I kinda expected DLC assets to somehow getting into the campaign. Like, would be cool to be able to get a Nyx in Bingo Fuel, if you have tanks DLC activated. You know, stuff like that.

[Igor Nikolaev 511]

11 hours ago, lexx said:

I haven't checked it out yet, but I kinda expected DLC assets to somehow getting into the campaign. Like, would be cool to be able to get a Nyx in Bingo Fuel, if you have tanks DLC activated. You know, stuff like that.

Hope it'll happen, East Wind looks a little bit boring with such lack of available content.

[jukk 4]

At least the Jets showcase has been updated so that the carrier is now "escorted" by a destroyer.

[MK84 42]

Anyone know what is the classname for the Venator cruise missile?

[the_one_and_only_Venator 162]

29 minutes ago, MK84 said:

Anyone know what is the classname for the Venator cruise missile?

 

Weapon (VLS):

weapon_VLS_01

 

Magazines (HE/ Cluster):

magazine_Missiles_Cruise_01_x18

magazine_Missiles_Cruise_01_Cluster_x18

 

Ammo (Missiles, HE/ Cluster):

ammo_Missile_Cruise_01

ammo_Missile_Cruise_01_Cluster

[MK84 42]

Excellent! Thanks.